This is the same Cory Booker who said he was Spartacus because he was releasing classified documents (they weren’t classified), then said he wasn’t Spartacus, then said Kavanaugh supporters-which include an overwhelming majority of North Dakotans- are ‘complicit in evil,’ and then said it didn’t matter whether Kavanaugh was ‘innocent or guilty,’ but that he just has to go.

Let’s be clear: North Dakotans don’t care why Heidi Heitkamp brought anti-Kavanaugh Cory, but they both have to go.

“Heidi Heitkamp is continuing to bring surrogates on her farewell tour that showcase her anti-North Dakota record,” said North Dakota Republican Party Communications Director Jake Wilkins. “Cory Booker is a strong reminder of Heidi Heitkamp’s anti-life, anti-gun vote on Justice Kavanaugh, and voters will hold her accountable for it on Election Day.”

After Heidi Heitkamp blew off votes on President Trump’s judicial nominees to come save her failing campaign, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced the Senate will adjourn through the November elections.

Now that she can’t hide from her constituents in her $1 million DC home, Heitkamp needs to answer the many questions surrounding her opposition to Justice Kavanaugh.

REMINDER— Heitkamp announced her cowardly decision to cave to Chuck Schumer last week. That same day Heitkamp said “anyone who made this decision prior to the completion of the FBI report … did so prematurely. She also said while she does believe Dr. Ford, “that doesn’t mean I don’t believe him [Kavanaugh].”

Since then, her story has dramatically changed. Heitkamp now admits her opposition had nothing to do with viewing the FBI report, but rather his “body language.” She’s also aired a campaign ad saying she does not believe him.

Heitkamp’s timeline for opposing Kavanaugh is inconsistent and her rationale is riddled with holes. North Dakotans deserve to have their questions answered, such as:

Did Heitkamp choose to oppose him following the FBI report or from watching him on TV with no sound?

Why did Heitkamp likely make a campaign ad before she viewed the FBI report?

A week ago today Heidi Heitkamp finally revealed she would vote against North Dakota by opposing Justice Kavanaugh. This was the day Heitkamp viewed the FBI report and said “anyone who made this decision prior to the completion of the FBI report … did so prematurely.” This was also the day Heitkamp said while she does believe Dr. Ford, “that doesn’t mean I don’t believe him.”

Since then, her story has dramatically changed. Heidi Heitkamp now admits her opposition to Justice Kavanaugh had nothing to do with viewing the FBI report she demanded, but rather his “body language.” She’s also aired a campaign ad– one she likely made before viewing the FBI report- where she says she does not believe him.

Heitkamp’s timeline for opposing Kavanaugh has been inconsistent and her rationale has been riddled with holes, and it’s left North Dakotans with more questions than answers, such as:

Did Heitkamp choose to oppose him following the FBI report or from watching him on TV with no sound?

Why did Heitkamp likely make a campaign ad before she viewed the FBI report?

Does Heitkamp condone the obstructionist tactics her colleagues used to derail this nomination?

The Heitkamp campaign and allies have dutifully followed her brother Joel Heitkamp’s orders to try to “move on” from this issue, but North Dakotans deserve answers for Heitkamp opposing their interests.

Many seem enamored that Heidi Heitkamp admitted her opposition to Justice Kavanaugh had nothing to do with anything he said or did, but rather his “body language” when she watched the hearing with no sound.

LET’S BE CLEAR—Her decision had nothing to do with a muted television. The only thing Heitkamp keeps on mute is her constituents as she’s voted against their interests for the last six years.

TIMELINE— Heidi Heitkamp made the cowardly decision to cave to Chuck Schumer.

– Then she filmed an ad about it.

– Then she reviewed the FBI report that she claimed was necessary.

– Then she told North Dakota her decision.

– Then she said anyone who had made their decision before they viewed the FBI report- like Heitkamp herself- had done so “prematurely.”

UNANSWERED QUESTIONS— Heitkamp’s explanation for her opposition has been riddled with inconsistencies from the start. North Dakotans deserve answers to the questions she’s so-far refused to answer, such as:

Even though her brother/de-facto spokesman said the campaign hopes voters will “move on” from this issue, Heitkamp says she wants a chance to explain her anti-life, anti-gun, anti-North Dakota vote. If that’s true, she should be able to answer these questions.

On the day of her announcement, Heitkamp said “anyone who made this decision prior to the completion of the FBI report … did so prematurely.” Yet she clearly filmed the ad before she viewed the report. Here’s the full timeline:

Thursday, October 4th

11:07am– Heitkamp concludes viewing the FBI report:

1:29pm– Heitkamp announces her opposition to Kavanaugh:

5:06pm- Report released where Heitkamp tells reporters “anyone who made this decision prior to the completion of the FBI report … did so prematurely:”

Friday, October 5th

12:14pm- Heidi Heitkamp sends the campaign ad to the television studios. Anchor Chris Berg has the latest:

Heidi Heitkamp opposed Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation, even though 60% of her constituents supported him. Now, she’s having a hard time explaining why.

Heitkamp’s rollout for her position has been riddled with inconsistencies, and there are questions that Heitkamp needs to answer:

Heitkamp said “we need to take politics out” of this process, so why did she release a political ad touting her position?

Heitkamp announced her decision last Thursday and released her new ad Saturday, though she had been in Washington DC the entire time. Did she film the ad out of state, or did she film it before she told North Dakotans her position?

Heitkamp says in this ad she doesn’t think he’s telling the truth, but she told local reporters “that doesn’t mean I don’t believe him.” Why is she telling media one thing, and voters another?

Heitkamp said in her ad this is about judgment and temperament. If so, does she agree with her colleagues that Brett Kavanaugh should be impeached?

Even though her brother and campaign surrogate Joel Heitkamp said their hope is that people “move on” from this issue, Heitkamp said this weekend she wants “to have the chance to explain why” she betrayed North Dakotans and voted no. If that’s the case, Heitkamp should be able to answer for the inconsistencies and holes in her rationale.

Heitkamp may seem incapabale of explaining her vote, but the reason is clear– Heitkamp only voted no so national Democrats would bail out her failing reelection campaign. Chuck Schumer told her to vote no, the people of North Dakota told her to vote yes, and she chose Schumer.

“Heidi Heitkamp made the cowardly choice to cave to Chuck Schumer and oppose Brett Kavanaugh,” said North Dakota Republican Party Communications Director Jake Wilkins. “North Dakotans didn’t send Heitkamp to the Senate to take anti-life, anti-gun, anti-North Dakota stances like the one she took today. Unlike Heitkamp, Kevin Cramer will always put the people of his state above his own political interests, and that’s why they’ll support him this November.”

Heidi Heitkamp today voted no on Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh, just as President Trump said she would. Heitkamp wants to paint her obstructionist opposition as non-political and courageous, but the opposite is true.

From the beginning, Heidi Heitkamp was told by Chuck Schumer to “stay netural” as long as she could so Democrats could try to derail this nomination, and she dutifully followed those orders. The day after a new poll showed her reelection hopes slipping away- the same day she “ran scared” to have an “animated” discussion with the DSCC Chair- Heidi Heitkamp announced she would vote no just so national Democrats wouldn’t stop propping up her failing campaign:

Hillary Clinton’s Super PAC Chairman:

CNN Political Anaylist:

Barack Obama campaign alum:

LET’S BE CLEAR– This vote was cowardly, not courageous. To appease her liberal Democrat base, Heidi Heitkamp just took an anti-life, anti-second amendment, and anti- North Dakota vote:

Nation’s Largest Pro-Life Group:

National Rifle Association:

Heidi Heitkamp’s Constituents:

North Dakota voters want for a Senator who won’t side with Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Chuck Schumer over their own interests. They are ready for Kevin Cramer, who will always put North Dakota first.

President Trump came to Fargo, ND in June for Kevin Cramer and made this proclamation about Heidi Heitkamp:

“Heidi will vote ‘no’ to any pick we make to the Supreme Court.”

The President was right. Heidi Heitkamp just sided with liberals Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi to obstruct President Trump and oppose the exceptionally qualified Judge Brett Kavanaugh.

LET’S BE CLEAR— Heidi Heitkamp just failed North Dakota, and voters know it. This race is now between a candidate who will be a voice for North Dakota and another candidate who politicizes every issue and staunchly opposes President Trump at every turn.

Given that a majority of her constituents want this exemplary nominee confirmed, Heidi Heitkamp is on the wrong side of history, and this will be the last consequential vote of her career.